Full emergency at STN
Nice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: All Over
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Full emergency at STN
I understand that a full emergency occurred at STN earlier this evening involving a BA aircraft (?!)
Not trying to sh1t stir, so please don't, just wondering what happened (other than the thankfully successful landing), and if it really was a BA aircraft.
Not trying to sh1t stir, so please don't, just wondering what happened (other than the thankfully successful landing), and if it really was a BA aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I just say how insensitive and thoughless this posting is. I have 2 relations who fly for BA, both working around this time along with lots of friends.
Surely you could have got a few more facts, you don't even really know if it is BA aircraft
Try picking up the phone and calling STN if you need to find out, rather than causing panic and worry for some people!
Surely you could have got a few more facts, you don't even really know if it is BA aircraft
Try picking up the phone and calling STN if you need to find out, rather than causing panic and worry for some people!
Nice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: All Over
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you heard this,
My apologies for any undue distress, but surely a proper reading of the original thread would have quashed all of your fears.
I clearly stated that it occurred earlier this evening (i.e. it is now all over)
I don't have all the facts, thats why I am asking.
I also stated that the aircraft landed safely (therefore there should be no worries)
I would also like to point out that by the very nature of this site and this particular forum (rumours and news) that this sort of thing will come up occasionally.
And as you point I out could telephone Stansted Airport, But do you honestly think they are likely to divulge details ? With due respect, wake up.
My apologies for any undue distress, but surely a proper reading of the original thread would have quashed all of your fears.
I clearly stated that it occurred earlier this evening (i.e. it is now all over)
I don't have all the facts, thats why I am asking.
I also stated that the aircraft landed safely (therefore there should be no worries)
I would also like to point out that by the very nature of this site and this particular forum (rumours and news) that this sort of thing will come up occasionally.
And as you point I out could telephone Stansted Airport, But do you honestly think they are likely to divulge details ? With due respect, wake up.
If a 'pan' was declared, by definition doesn't that make it an 'urgency', rather than an emergency.
BTW, what is a 'full' emergency compared to, say, a standard one?
BTW, what is a 'full' emergency compared to, say, a standard one?
I'd say Paracab's posting is fair comment. If anyone is too precious to take it then don't look at anything associated with aviation.
Don't usually get into this sort of thing but just in from pub
Don't usually get into this sort of thing but just in from pub
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you heard this
I don't think that many PPRuNers would have panicked at that title, even those of us who have worked for BA for a few years.
( Just returned from an evening in t'pub with Basil)
Airclues
I don't think that many PPRuNers would have panicked at that title, even those of us who have worked for BA for a few years.
( Just returned from an evening in t'pub with Basil)
Airclues
Emergency? Big deal. Why do Ppruners often dig so hard for every such declaration on an ATC freq.?
In the US, we would have to declare an emergency on a certain aircraft (such as precautionary landing over max landing wt., or engine failure...), but even for a legal reason (re-certification for noise): for using the original full landing flaps on a slippery runway [and used for over 20 years], because of the non-standard flap setting!
Pilots who worked here for certain freight airlines, i.e. Connie Kallitta, were instructed never to declare an emergency for an engine shutdown or flame-out at altitude. They just told ATC that they need a descent-now! They would be fired in such situations if the company heard about so many emergency declarations. The FAA allowed this situation to be quite commonplace-THEY did not want to know about it...........................
Their employer would have attracted much attention from the FAA (CAA).
A pilot at another US passenger carrier, who had flown for a certain European Navy squadron, told me that he flew a freighter DC-6 with an engine ON FIRE into an airport in North Carolina-he also never declared anything with ATC-this baffled the tower controller who saw the smoke and flames. The infamous company would have fired the Captain because the company cheated on everything possible in order to avoid extra maintenance expenses. He also flew DC-3s, Falcons and Lears. Again, one of the very numerous situations in which the FAA did not want to hear about it-because only freight was carried onboard.
In the US, we would have to declare an emergency on a certain aircraft (such as precautionary landing over max landing wt., or engine failure...), but even for a legal reason (re-certification for noise): for using the original full landing flaps on a slippery runway [and used for over 20 years], because of the non-standard flap setting!
Pilots who worked here for certain freight airlines, i.e. Connie Kallitta, were instructed never to declare an emergency for an engine shutdown or flame-out at altitude. They just told ATC that they need a descent-now! They would be fired in such situations if the company heard about so many emergency declarations. The FAA allowed this situation to be quite commonplace-THEY did not want to know about it...........................
Their employer would have attracted much attention from the FAA (CAA).
A pilot at another US passenger carrier, who had flown for a certain European Navy squadron, told me that he flew a freighter DC-6 with an engine ON FIRE into an airport in North Carolina-he also never declared anything with ATC-this baffled the tower controller who saw the smoke and flames. The infamous company would have fired the Captain because the company cheated on everything possible in order to avoid extra maintenance expenses. He also flew DC-3s, Falcons and Lears. Again, one of the very numerous situations in which the FAA did not want to hear about it-because only freight was carried onboard.
Last edited by Ignition Override; 16th Apr 2004 at 04:46.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice to see once again a genuine query treated with contempt and disregard by individuals.
I suggest for future postings, we stick with:
"I believe something may have happened to an aircraft somewhere."
to kee people happy. Either that, or perhaps PPRuNe should just shut up shop and we'll all go home? Would that be better?
Er, hmm, could it be curiosity? Interest? Nah, don't be silly!
I suggest for future postings, we stick with:
"I believe something may have happened to an aircraft somewhere."
to kee people happy. Either that, or perhaps PPRuNe should just shut up shop and we'll all go home? Would that be better?
Why do Ppruners often dig so hard for every such declaration on an ATC freq
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Where the Money Takes Me
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote
"......STN probably chosen due good Bae146 maintenance support"
This I doubt and quite a cynical remark don't you think?
In any case, all CityJet maintenance done at Norwich so why wouldn't they drop in there if it was a decision of mere choice?
"......STN probably chosen due good Bae146 maintenance support"
This I doubt and quite a cynical remark don't you think?
In any case, all CityJet maintenance done at Norwich so why wouldn't they drop in there if it was a decision of mere choice?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Almaty
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't NWI close at night whereas STN is H24? Might get in okay but what about carrying on to Paris when fixed. Also routing takes that flight much closer to STN than NWI. If a serious problem what flights could you put the pax on from NWI? STN seems a good call to me (purely from a logistical viewpoint).
Luckily I am not a cynic but if I were I might think STN a good choice for a crew to go out of hours and fly home, more so than NWI!
Luckily I am not a cynic but if I were I might think STN a good choice for a crew to go out of hours and fly home, more so than NWI!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Where the Money Takes Me
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't think you're getting my drift Harrier!
I am saying that STN was a choice made out of neccesity rather than just the fact that STN was a good base for one four sick maintenance!
I am saying that STN was a choice made out of neccesity rather than just the fact that STN was a good base for one four sick maintenance!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dublin
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B.A.E. -Bring another Engine! They should carry at least 2 spares in the flyaway kit just to keep the A/C flying round the route.
Its nearly unheard of to have a "scheduled" Engine change on a 146 as they never last that long.
Its nearly unheard of to have a "scheduled" Engine change on a 146 as they never last that long.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW, what is a 'full' emergency compared to, say, a standard one?
I too thought the original posting was reasonable - no need for the curt response that followed.
The original posting also made clear that the flight landed safely so whats the problem even if people on this forum did have relatives on board?
Some people on this forum are incredibly touchy!!
The original posting also made clear that the flight landed safely so whats the problem even if people on this forum did have relatives on board?
Some people on this forum are incredibly touchy!!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Almaty
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have no worries at all if anybody I knew was onboard. As I work in aviation (and presumably most people on these forums do) then I am well aware of these things happening fairly often so I would have less worries reading it here than if it was on the news channels. By the time these things are on PPrune it has all happened anyway and if a serious incident or accident the news channels would have the first reports.
I read these forums to find out what is happening, good or bad. If you don't want to know the bad then just stick to the innocuous titles, don't open anything mentioning accident or emergency.
I read these forums to find out what is happening, good or bad. If you don't want to know the bad then just stick to the innocuous titles, don't open anything mentioning accident or emergency.